Class #5, 2/20/12

**Roster, etc.

**Due tonight:
------>Reading:
------>------>The Introduction to Unit Four, pp 123ff
------>------>Moses Maimonides (Rambam), "Negative Theology," pp 133ff
------>------>Thomas Aquinas, "God is Omnipotent" pp 138ff
------>------>George Mavrodes, "Some puzzles concerning omnipotence,"  pp 141ff
------>------>Boethius, "God is Timeless," pp 150ff
------>------>Nicholas Wolterstorff, "God is Everlasting," pp 153ff

------>Writing:  Which approach to discussion about God do you favor--the "nothing can be said" approach or the "something must be said" approach?  Why?

**Discussion points:
------>Who are these people?
------>Can we orient and compare their different positions?
------>------>[Hint:  try a triangle]
------>Can we feel assured that we know anything about God?
------>In this area of life, is reason trustworthy or must we always operate on "faith alone"--or "Scripture alone"?
------>If God is God, what must God be?

**For next week:  Arguments about God's Existence.
------>Read--in this order: 
------>------>Thomas Aquinas--The Classical Cosmological Argument, pp 184ff
------>------>Saint Anselm--The Classical Ontological Argument, pp 169ff
------>------>Gaunilo--Critique of the Cosmological Argument, pp 171ff
------>------>Robert M. Adams--Moral Arguments for God's Existence, pp 231ff

------>Write:  OK, Which argument--or none--works for you?  Explain.  Remember that there is a possibility that even a segment of the believing community--like Pascal--doesn't buy the premise that one can rationally demonstrate God's existence.